New Bill introduced proposing CCW in establishment serving liquor

[Tim Nunan]

I for one am fully aware that this has somehwere between little and no chance of ever becoming a law. There is a possibility at any rate that it could pass in the senate, if I understand correctly. I can easily see King Jimmy squashing it in the house.

At best this will get a little notoriety amongst the public. Someday Naifeh will die or maybe even retire and when that happens the public might be accepting of a law of this type and it could be brought out again and then pass.

Some things start with baby steps.

A way to assist Naifeh into retirement is for us to support whoever is running against him.

[saintsfanbrian]

Aren't sporting arena's already on the no-no list?

PS - Email sent to the two that are even close to my area. Though both are on the committee and they both already voted in favor.

[Fallguy]

Aren't sporting arena's already on the no-no list?

Possiably if the are owned but a goverment entity, but not just because they are a sports arena. But still there may be other places, that is just the first place that came to mind.

[cadillacdude1975]

the amendment was added in the hopes of getting it passed i do believe. while it would still restrict bar carry, I.E. the hole in the wall bars that have a jukebox, pool table and a bartender, it would still allow you to goto Chili's or O`Charley's or Red Lobster as the majority of that income is from food, not alcohol entirely. and i agree with that. maybe this will let it get though this time. lets keep our fingers crossed.

[Guest canynracer]

I hope it passes, I dont go to bars, but I do go to resturaunts...whatever it takes, and any ammendment is a step forward....

[Fallguy]

While I still think someone should be allowed to carry in a "bar" if they aren't drinking (why are you there if you're not though..lol), I do understand the reasoning behind it.

I'm just saying I would rather see it say places less than 50% from alcohol for onsite consumption rather than more than 50% from food.

Here is the e-mail I sent to Senator that propossed the amendmeant.

Senator Berke,

Sir I would like to address a concern about this amendment. I assume the purpose of this is to prevent a person with a permit issued under 39-17-1351 from carrying his firearm into a "bar". While I personally think as long as the permit holder is not consuming alcohol that he should be allowed to carry, I can understand the reasoning of not allowing him to. However I think wording to the effect of "Entering an establishment that derives less than fifty percent (50%) of it's annual income from the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption;" would be better than"Entering an establishment that derives at least fifty percent (50%) of its annual income from the sale of food;"

The reason is there are places that serve alcohol for onsite consumption that are not "bars or taverns" but are not restaurants either and therefore doubtfully have greater than 50% of their annual income from food.

Respectfully,

Steve Fall

But even as worded now, if it helps it pass...I would take it.

[Mike.357]

While I still think someone should be allowed to carry in a "bar" if they aren't drinking (why are you there if you're not though..lol), I do understand the reasoning behind it.

blood would run in the streets if they allowed carry in a bar, oh wait no it wouldn't.

I am also assuming that the criminals leave the roscoes in the car or at home when they go bar hopping.

I can go to bars and not drink. I like to shoot pool, play pinball, socialize with others.

Just cause I am in a bar doesn't mean I am drinking.

[Fallguy]

I can go to bars and not drink. I like to shoot pool, play pinball, socialize with others.

Just cause I am in a bar doesn't mean I am drinking.

Yep.

My sarcasm wasn't as clear....lol

[Guest Jason F.]

I got a positive response directly from Senator Tracy who stated that he was in full support of the bill and was also a supporter of the NRA. I had previously received a similar positive response from Senator Tracy's assistant. So one vote down, the rest of you make those calls and send those emails.

[jughead]

cadillacdude75 i like your letter but dont you think we have enough felonies on the books.

[strickj]

can go to bars and not drink. I like to shoot pool, play pinball, socialize with others.

Just cause I am in a bar doesn't mean I am drinking.

i do this often and never pick up a beer

[Guest Len]

I contacted my state senator (Diane Black of Gallatin) urging her support. She has replied to me that she is a co-sponsor of the bill, she thinks it will pass the Senate (it did last year without the amendment) and urges all supporters to focus their lobbying in the house.

The House has a different (larger, more complex) committee structure than the Senate. As of today, there has been no action in the house, while the full Senate will vote on 1/16.

Best bet for movement in the House: Contact the lead sponsor in the House -Rep. Joe McCord of Maryville. Here's his contact info:

214 War Memorial Building Nashville, TN 37243-0108Phone (615) 741-5481 Fax (615) 253-0220

Staff Contact: Phyllis Piercyrep.joe.mccord@legislature.state.tn.us

Ask him (or his key staffer Phyllis) the likely committee route this bill will take and how you can best target your lobbying. If you live in Sevier or Blount counties, so much the better.

Prediction: If it gets to the House floor, it passes and will be signed by the Governor. However, it can die in Commerce or one of many other committees. The amendment should help.

Note on the amendment: This will allow a permit holder to basically carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, but not in "pure" bars. (The "50% rule.")

[waynesan]

Thanks Len for the update. This really needs to pass this year. We've been waiting too long. This and Park carry are my two biggest gripes about Tenn. laws.

[Fallguy]

Note on the amendment: This will allow a permit holder to basically carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, but not in "pure" bars. (The "50% rule.")

I still think if this amendmenat is necessary I would rather it say less than 50% from alcohol rather than greater than 50% from food. What about the bowling alley that servers beer? The amendmeant as written would still prevent us from carrying in there because less than 50% of the alley's revenue is from food, (at least I figure it is).

[Daniel]

i dont understand the difference between less then 50% from alcohol or greater than 50% from food. ..... wait unless hes right about the bowling alley thing.

[molonlabetn]

It is highly improbable that a bowling alley derives more than 50% of its revenue from alcohol... But either way, such an assessment would be on a case-by-case basis, even if there was one 'bowling alley' out there which might as well be just a bar.

[saintsfanbrian]

There are many places that serve alcohol that don't serve food primarily. The Bowling Alley, the sports complex, the billiard hall etc. These places also don't primarily server food.

By stating that the establishment has to have 50% of their sales from Food limits this type of place. I seriously doubt that a bowling alley really has 50% of their sales from food, but I bet their alcohol is less than 50%.

[molonlabetn]

There is no requirement concerning what the other 50%+ of the business' revenue comes from... it does not have to be 'food'. As long as the alcohol sales aren't greater than 50% of the equation, a packer is fine.

[Fallguy]

There is no requirement concerning what the other 50%+ of the business' revenue comes from... it does not have to be 'food'. As long as the alcohol sales aren't greater than 50% of the equation, a packer is fine.

Yes there is, have you read it. Amendmeant 1 to SB0023

AMEND Senate Bill No. 23* House Bill No. 702

SA0830

By deleting the amendatory language of SECTION 1 and substituting instead the following:

(3)

(A) Entering an establishment that derives at least fifty percent (50%) of

its annual income from the sale of food;

( Authorized to carry a firearm under § 39-17-1351;

© Is not consuming liquor, wine, beer or other alcoholic beverages, as

defined in this section; and

(D) Is not otherwise prohibited by the posting provisions of § 39-17-1359.

[molonlabetn]

My bad... I only read the bill itself and didn't see the amendment.

That is worded differently than any other 51% law I've ever read.

[DMark]

Folks, you do know that even if the committees vote to send it to the floor, that Jimmy Naifeh will use his power to not allow it to come for a vote, don't you?

Unless we hire his wife to lobby for it.........

[Fallguy]

That is worded differently than any other 51% law I've ever read.

I agree 100% with you on that!

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

I was always under the impression that under 50% alcohol, and you're a restaurant. Over 50% alcohol and you're a bar.

[Guest 270win]

I don't think Tennessee makes a difference under ABC statutes whether you are a bar or restaurant. Both have to get the same liquor and beer licenses from the state. Some states like Texas and Arkansas make a difference on what is considered a bar and restaurant based on how much revenue a place makes of alcohol (AR is more than 40% and TX is 51%).

[Guest canynracer]

I will take whatever I can get...if I can go out to eat, for now, it is the right direction...they need to put the test laws out there...if we get the resturaunts, but no bowling alley this year, we prove that we are all good little citizens, and the blood will not pour into the streets cause there is a beer near my gun (even though I am NOT drinking it) then other ammendments will follow...

I know its baby steps, but it is a step.